Conditional Cash Transfers

Question 1

Problems with ‘Universal’ cash transfer programmes? (2)

Answer 1

1) Efficiency Loss

2) Larger disincentive to work

Question 2

Problems with targeted programmes? (4)

Answer 2

1. Certain characteristics, like disability, are measured with error
2. It can change incentives around family formation
3. Efficiency loss
4. Ethical issues

Question 3

What are the objectives of CCTs? (2)

Answer 3

1. Reduce poverty and inequality via the direct transfer of monetary resources to poor families
2. Break the inter-generational transfer of disadvantage by giving incentives for human capital

Question 4

Economic reason supporting conditional cash transfers

Answer 4

1. Private investment in human capital of children can be below the socially optimal level due to the positive externalises

Question 5

Political ground for conditional cash transfers

Answer 5

it supports people across the political spectrum, so it is easier to gather support for it

Question 6

Arguments against conditional cash transfers (3)

Answer 6

1. Conditional is costly
2. It may lead to the exclusion of those who need it most
3. Ethics: social protection is a human right to which conditions should not be applied.

Question 7

Along which dimensions are the impact of CCTs measured? (6)

Answer 7

• Education
• Time use
• Health and Nutrition
• Consumption, Investment and savings
• Gender
• Demographic

Question 8

Why did adult labour supply not decrease due to CCTs? (3)

Answer 8

1. Elasticity of leisure is very low because the households are very poor
2. Decrease in child labour due to conditionals means no scope for a decrease in adult labour supply
3. Often these transfers are seen as temporary

Question 9

What are the three key findings in Gertler (2004) paper? (3)

Answer 9

1. Progressa had a significant and positive impact on the health of children
2. Impact is bigger the younger the children were when they received the intervention
3. Impact is bigger the longer the children were in the program

Question 10

In The Gertler (2004) paper, what were the three child health outcomes resulting from CCTs? (3)

Answer 10

1. Morbidity
   - Treatment of newborns were 25.3% less likely that the control to be reported as ill
   - Treatment 0-3 years were 22.3% less likely to be reports as ill
   - After 2 years on the programme, treatment children were 39.5% less likely than controls to be reported as ill
2. Height of the children
   - 0.96cm taller
3. Anaemia
   - Treatment children were 25.5% less likely to be anaemic than control children

Question 11

What as the aim of the Barrera-Osorol, Linen and Saavedra paper?

Answer 11

To investigate the impact of CCT in Columbia on the median and long-term educational outcomes across varying programme designs

Question 12

What are the key findings of the Barrera-Osorol, Linen and Saavedra paper? (3)

Answer 12

1. On-time secondary and tertiary enrolments increased
2. Effect is via savings and not conditionals
3. No Long term effects

Question 13

What were the two districts called in the Barrera-Osorol, Linen and Saavedra paper?

Answer 13

1. San Cristobal

2. Suba

Question 14

What were the medium term on-time enrolment in secondary education findings of the Barrera-Osorol, Linen and Saavedra paper? (3)

Answer 14

• All treatments increase the probability of enrolment
• Highest increase is in the ‘savings’ treatment
• No effect on taking the exit exam

Question 15

What were the medium term on-time tertiary enrolment findings of the Barrera-Osorol, Linen and Saavedra paper? (3)

Answer 15

• Basic Treatment had no effect
• Savings treatment increased enrolment in ‘good’ quality tertiary education
• Tertiary treatments increased enrolments in ‘low’ quality tertiary institutions

Question 16

What were the long-term finding of the Barrera-Osorol, Linen and Saavedra paper? (2)

Answer 16

• No effect on long-term tertiary enrolment

- no effect on tertiary education

Question 17

How do we establish effect?

Answer 17

1. Temporal Ordering (X comes before Y)
2. Cause and effect have to be established
3. We have to credibly remove any confounding factors or alternative explanations

Question 18

What the the findings of the education effects of progresa? (5)

Answer 18

• School enrolment increased
• Grade repetition when down
• Completed years of schooling went up
• However although the short term impacts are large, the short term impacts remain unclear
• Because the quality of schooling was low, there is no clear evidence of actual learning and achievement

Question 19

What are the time use findings of progresa? (3)

Answer 19

• Child labour decreased (Conditionally and income effect)
• Some differences across boys are girls (Non-market work for girls is often still expected to their drop in work was smaller)
• Adult time use does not decrease

Question 20

What are the health and nutritional findings of progresa?

Answer 20

Gertler

Question 21

What are the consumption, investment and savings findings of progresa? (2)

Answer 21

• Household consumption increased (mostly food intake)

- Increase in self entrepreneurship and self employment increased

Question 22

What was the impact of progresa on gender? (2)

Answer 22

• Improvement in the decision making power of women within households
• Some evidence of a fall in domestic violence

Question 23

What was the impact of demography due to prograse? (2)

Answer 23

• Evidence of marriage/co-inhabiting increased
• not change in fertility of woman
• Long-term: girls who grew up in the programme delay marriage and child baring.